The First Person Singular of the Athematic Middle Optative in Vedic and Indo-Iranian.

• Author: Gukkel, Dieter

1. INTRODUCTION

   Forms of the first person singular of the athematic middle optative are unanimously transmitted as ending in -Tya in the Rgveda (RV), as in later Sanskrit, e.g., isiya 'I would be lord' (3x), bhaksiya 'I would have a share' (3x), a/[a.sub.c]cha... vavrtiya 'I would turn... here' (3x). The prosodic shape of the termination -iya is metrically supported in verses such as RV 10.53.4, where the poet locates masiya 'I would devise' line-finally, realizing the rhythm [??] - x that regularly closes eleven-syllable tristubh padas (i.e., verse-lines).

   (1) tad adya vacah 5| prathamam masiya [yenasurdm 4| abhi deva dsama Might I today devise this as the foremost of speech, by which we gods will overcome the Asuras. (10.53.4ab) (1) Alongside such attestations, however, we encounter others that suggest that the poets knew and used forms in *-iya as well. The most striking example is at 7.32.18, where we find isiya 'I would be lord' and rdsiya '1 would give' at the end of eight-syllable padas, where they appear to realize the very rare rhythm - - x instead of the regular and expected rhythm [??] - x. Including these two examples (i.e., isiya, rdsiya), the seventh position is realized with a heavy syllable in only one and a half percent of eight-syllable verse-lines of this type.

   (2) yad indra yavatas [t.sub.u]vdm etavad ahdm isiya stotaram id 4| didhiseya raddvaso na papatvaya rasiya If I were lord of as much as you are, Indra, I would seek to make just my praiser (well) set up, you excavator of goods; I would not give him over to ill-estate. (7.32.18) Given the nature of the transmission of the Rgveda, which involved--among other things--the replacement of linguistically older forms with younger ones, (2) we will consider reconstructing, or "restoring," *isiya and *rasiya at 7.32.18.

   Generally speaking, we consider making that kind of restoration if a form or set of forms frequently disrupts the usual rhythmic pattern required by the meter. We consider the restoration more secure if there is a plausible linguistic explanation for the form. Given the replacement of older forms with younger ones just mentioned, such an explanation often involves internal or external linguistic reconstruction. Regarding the history of these particular optative forms, Kuhn (1863: 454-55) was the first to notice the metrical irregularities in 7.32.18 and propose the restorations *isiya and *rasiya, but his linguistic explanation of the forms, which derived them via a preconsonantal shortening (iy > iy), is not at all plausible from our current perspective. Brugmann acknowledged the restorations in both editions of the Grundriss (1892: 1303; 1916: 546) and proposed that *-iya was phonologically regular, reasoning that the optative suffix plus ending /-i-a/ should yield *-(i)ya in the same way that /-i-ur/ yielded -(i)yur in the third person plural active of the athematic optative (1892: 1303). In his commentary on 7.32.18 Oldenberg (1909-12) noted the possibility of restoring *isiya and *rasiya and added a third candidate, namely *asiya for asiya 'I would reach' at 2.33.2 = (3) below. For a linguistic explanation Oldenberg referred to Brugmann.

   Since then, the putative forms in *-iya have received little attention, to my knowledge. They are not mentioned in recent handbook treatments of Vedic and Indo-Iranian morphology (e.g., Goto 2013: 93; Goto 2018: 361-62; Kiimmel 2018a: 1911) or in historical analyses of the phonology and morphology of the Indo-European optative (Jasanoff 2009). That is perfectly understandable. As Oldenberg notes, the scarcity of the data makes it difficult to judge whether or not there is sufficient evidence to reconstruct *-iya. Regarding Brugmann's proposal, the current reconstruction of the relevant termination for PIE is */-[ih.sub.1]-[h.sub.2]e/, and it is not immediately obvious that this would develop to Vedic *-iya by regular sound change. For these reasons, it is not surprising that Martin Kiimmel reconstructs *-i-Ha for Indo-Iranian in his recent, authoritative sketch of Indo-Iranian morphology (2018a: 1916-19), which is clearly intended to be the preform of -iya, not *-iya.

2. THE STANDARD VERSE-LINES AND CORPUS

   When we consider making a restoration on metrical grounds, we rely on the three "standard" pada-types that make up well over four fifths of the Rgveda, i.e., the eight-syllable dimeter line (8a) and the eleven-syllable (11a) and twelve-syllable (12a) trimeter lines. (3) It is convenient to represent the meters using a shorthand notation in which the breve ([??]), the anceps (x), and the longum (-) represent positions that the poets realize with a heavy syllable in 0-33%, 34-66%, and 67-100% of padas, respectively. Although the final position of each pada-type qualifies as a longum on those criteria, I give it as an anceps to reflect the effects of final indifference (see below). Note that "4|" and "5|" mark the caesurae after the fourth or fifth syllable of 11[sigma] and 12[sigma].

   8[sigma] is primarily used in anustubh, gayatri, and the lyric meters such as the brhatl stanza cited in (2), (4) 11[sigma] in tristubh, and 12[sigma] in jagati.

   I exclude the Valakhilya hymns (8.49-59), which are a later addition to the Rgveda, as well as all instances of repeated padas (such as refrains) except the first. This leaves us with the corpus of standard pada-types shown in Table 1, whose size is given in padas as well as syllables.

   A closer look at syllable weight distribution in the standard pada-types reflects two well-known principles that are at work in all meters of the Rgveda, final strictness and final indifference (cf. Ryan 2019: 139). Final strictness applies to the pada as a whole: the later in the pada, the more strictly the poets regulate syllable weight. (5) Final indifference targets the final syllable of the pada: it should be indifferent to weight. The effects of both are clearly visible in 8c (Fig. 2), which is rhythmically iambic. If we consider the "strong" positions (2, 4, 6, 8), we observe an increase in heavy-realization up until the final position. Final strictness is responsible for the increase, whereas the exceptional status of the final position is due to final indifference. Note that final indifference may only partially override weight preferences in final position (Ryan 2019: 151-53).

3. A TRADITIONAL METRICIAN'S VIEW OF THE FORMS

   Returning to the topic of restoration, I noted above that we rely especially heavily on the standard pada-types. Within those, we traditionally rely almost exclusively on the parts of the verse-line where the meter is more strictly regulated: the latter half (i.e., cadence) of 8a and the post-caesural portions of 11[sigma] and 12[sigma]. If the form or set of forms in question disrupts the usual rhythmic pattern there frequently enough, we consider emending the text, and if linguistic reconstruction--internal or external--supports an emendation, we consider it more secure.

   In those more strictly regulated parts of the verse-line, we find three attestations that suggest restoring *-iya versus six that support -iya. We already saw two potential *-iya forms above at 7.32.18 = (2). I will add here that in 7.32 the eight-syllable padas that end with isiya and rasiya are in brhatT meter, which rules out the possibility that we are dealing with "trochaic" gayatri, the only meter in which line-final - - x would be expected in "b" and "d" padas (i.e., the second and fourth lines of the stanza). In "epic" (also known as "late") anustubh (Oldenberg 1888: 26-31; Oldenberg 1909; Arnold 1905: 149-74), the Rgvedic forerunner of the later sloka meter of Sanskrit epic, line-final - - x would be unsurprising in "a" and "c" padas. Furthermore, 7.32 is not otherwise metrically anomalous as a whole: the remaining one hundred and six padas of 7.32 exhibit a light penultimate syllable as expected in 8[Sigma]. (6)

   The third potential *-iya form is at 2.33.2b. There, the poet locates the verb immediately after the early caesura in 11[sigma], resulting in the unusual realization of the sixth position with a heavy syllable. In 11[sigma] with an early caesura, the sixth position is realized with a heavy syllable just under six percent of the time.

   (3) tvadattebhi 4| [rud.sub.a]ra sdmtamebhih satam hima 4| asiya bhesajebhih Through the remedies given by you that bring best luck, Rudra, might I reach a hundred winters. (2.33.2ab) As for the six forms that support -iya, we already encountered masiya line-finally in 11[sigma] at 10.53.4a = (1). We also have disiya and asiya pada-finally in 11[sigma], likewise realizing the expected rhythm [??] - x. It is important to note that these two forms are attested in the same hymn to Rudra (2.33) as the post-caesural asiya--possibly to be "restored" to *asiya--that we have just seen (3).

   (4) ava stomebhi 5| [rud.sub.a]am disiya With my praises might I cut off Rudra as my own exclusive portion. (2.33.5b) (7) (5) [phrase omitted] Free of malady, might I reach (this), like shade during the heat. (2.33.6c) The remaining three occurrences are instances of vavrtiya located immediately following the late caesura in 11[sigma], realizing the expected rhythm [??]

   (6) [phrase omitted] [phrase omitted] With a laud might I turn you here for the giving of a cow, as the time- worn son of Tugra did, o wondrous ones. (1.180.5ab) (7) [a.sub.c]cha sumnaya 5| vavrttya devan I would turn the gods here for their good favor. (1.186.10d) (8) a vam sdsvadbhir 5| vavrtiya vajaih Might I turn you two [=Indra and Agni, -DG] here with perpetual prizes. (7.93.6d) Considering these nine RV attestations, we will agree with Oldenberg that -iya is metrically secure and that byforms in *-iya are possible.

   In my view, there are three shortcomings to the traditional metrician's view of the forms. First, I and the readers would like to know more precisely how likely it is that the poets used byforms in *-iya. Second, we have not taken into account the...